5 ms·
>less code -> less code at large that doesn't necessarily follow
by magmadiver 11y ago
>less code -> less code at large
that doesn't necessarily follow
- loup-vaillant 11y agoHow so? Your claim sounds "obviously false". We need an example.
- loup-vaillant 11y agoScrap the scare quotes, it is obviously false. Less code in the small does imply less code in the large. It doesn't need any justification, it is a tautology: if it takes less code to write all the small things in your program, the program itself will have less code overall. Or did I misunderstood the meaning of "less code"?